click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
. most of the problems we have in terms of the pentagon budget are not a problem of mismanagement at the pentagon or at the department of defense. it is a problem of misallocation of resources from the front end. let me give you one example of that. soviets during the cold war had a saying better is the enemy of good enough. they would look at the military equipment, if what they had was good enough to do the job they would not overpay for something better. here in the states we have serious problem overpaying for equipment that is more than adequate for the job that is required. a perfect example of that is the f-35. you i am a retired naval aviator. i spent 20 years fly for the united states navy, 3500 flight hours. if the navy would capable or run its own purchase program the navy wouldn't go anywhere near the f-35 because it cost 2 1/2 times as much f-18 for only marginal increase in capability. melissa: let me start you there. i'm all in favor of cutting spending. >> gotcha. melissa: one. my favorite things in the world except when we're talking about handbags. setting that a
pakistan? we have not declared war on pakistan. ascends drones that killed 1,000 people because pentagon officials say these people a terrorist? yes, says the american government and former u.n. ambassador john bolton says it is morally right to kill these people with drones and we are safer because of it. it does not seem morally right. take the word of some government officials that this guy is a terrorist and send a machine to kill him and to kill civilians along with him. >> well, the whole point of the war on terror from the perspective of the terrorist is to abuse the rules we have tried to create over hundreds of years to separate the combatants from innocent civilians. so the war on terror is different from traditional state to state war. the commander-in-chief authority vested by the constitution in the president gives in the direction over the were capabilities of the united states. his efforts both in the bush and obama administration to go after the terrorist, i think is entirely justified both by the constitution and by our inherent right of self-defense. john: american kill
with the deejaying today. the pentagon taking action, it is postponing deployment of two warship toss the persian gulf. that will leave just one aircraft carrier, the uss john c. stennis,ing in the entire middle east region. this begs the question what are we risking by doing this? chris armor is senior naval analyst with the institute for the study of war. chris, welcome back to the show. what -- how dangerous is this? what does this mean to you? >> melissa, thanks for having me. it's a pleasure to be here. yes, it's a big deal. when people hear about it, they simply say, okay, the cut from two carriers to one doesn't seem like a big deal million you understand the broad -- until you understand the broader context in the middle east. over the past three years, we've seen a steep decline in the american ground forces across the middle east. we've withdrawn, essentially, all of our troops from iraq, we're on the way from withdrawing from afghanistan, so really what we're talking about is the navy is there to check against iranian ambition. with two carrier strike groups in the area, we've got a ve
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)